Did Jesus say he was God???

[Shuttlecraft]

Jehovah's Witnesses don't celebrate Christmas, Easter and birthdays, they think church spires are pagan, they won't wear crucfixes or have crosses in their homes, they think Jesus died on a stake, and they let each other die for want of blood transfusions.
And earlier this year a 70-year old JW big shot in Seattle called me "ignorant, a fable-spinner, talks drivel, a deceiver, a racist, self-deluded".

So it looks like their 'New World Translation' has messed them up bad..

 

[Nada]

I would like to point out that JW.ORG is the first ones that pop up. Meaning its a self Declaration of their own bible translation...


Wikipedia has this about the NWT

The New World Bible translation committee had no known translators with recognized degrees in Greek or Hebrew exegesis or translation... None of these men had any university education except Franz, who left school after two years, never completing even an undergraduate degree." Franz had stated that he was familiar with not only Hebrew, but with Greek, Latin, Spanish, Portuguese, German, and French for the purpose of biblical translation.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Translation_of_the_Holy_Scriptures#cite_note-26

I type in "most accurate bible in the world" and it brings up Wikepedia first.It's also the second.The third takes you to a FAQ on jw.org.The fourth takes you to a yahoo question forum about the NWT.

 

[Nada]

Jehovah's Witnesses don't celebrate Christmas, Easter and birthdays, they think church spires are pagan, they won't wear crucfixes or have crosses in their homes, they think Jesus died on a stake, and they let each other die for want of blood transfusions.
And earlier this year a 70-year old JW big shot in Seattle called me "ignorant, a fable-spinner, talks drivel, a deceiver, a racist, self-deluded".

So it looks like their 'New World Translation' has messed them up bad..

Yes ,it is true that JW's do not celebrate those holidays.Yes,it is true JW's do not use crosses.Yes,it is true they do not receive blood transfusions either.As for someone calling you ignorant.I cant help you there.People say things they should not be saying all the time.Everybody makes mistakes.

 

[Shuttlecraft]

I bet atheists don't let each other die for want of blood transfusions like Jehovah's Witnesses do..

 

[metis]

When i read the scripture, i see many Jewish leader expressing exactly what you seem to deny. many times the Jewish Leaders saw Jesus as claiming equality to God in their minds. Still Jesus had followers...

First of all, there are many verses whereas Jesus clearly implies he's not God, such as his saying that he knows not when the end-times will occur and only the Father knows for sure. Some here have cited other such verses, so I need not go any further with this point. If God knows but Jesus doesn't, then there is no equality.

Secondly, imagine if I tell you "I am God"; what do you think about this? Now imagine being brought up in a religion that states that God is not incorporeal.

Thirdly, what I do believe we're most likely seeing is the early church belief that Jesus is of God, which doesn't mean he is God. When you read the references towards Jesus, keep this in mind.

Fourthly, we have to remember that scriptures reflect the various author's concepts, which by the nature of the subject material tends to be subjective. After Gandhi died, for example, many Hindus basically began to deify him, but that didn't take because Gandhi had made it clear he was only a man.

What exactly do you think is Symbolism about Jesus that might be Controversial ?

Jesus is pretty much portrayed as being both a new Adam and new Moses, neither of which were God of course, but which reflects a symbolism used extensively in our writings. The Suffering Servant accounts in Isaiah are not about Jesus, but the authors draw a parallel that Jews back then generally would understand as being symbolic. Etc.

 

[1robin]

I type in "most accurate bible in the world" and it brings up Wikepedia first.It's also the second.The third takes you to a FAQ on jw.org.The fourth takes you to a yahoo question forum about the NWT.

I think it brings up wiki as a source not an example.

 

[Nada]

I think it brings up wiki as a source not an example.

You are totally correct.Wikepedia is the source.The example I speak of is the reference by the scholar and director in Jerusalem who's comment was published about the NWT.

 

[Nada]

I bet atheists don't let each other die for want of blood transfusions like Jehovah's Witnesses do..

Most probably do not.They do not have the same beliefs as the JW's.Some on the other hand might not do it because of the risk involved in catching HIV or Hepatitis.The JW's have their reasons per the holy scriptures, and show their faith in God by adhering to His commands.It might be difficult for some to understand this, but to people who put all of their faith in God,and understand what God says about blood in His Word,its not a problem to see where they are coming from

 

[1robin]

You are totally correct.Wikepedia is the source.The example I speak of is the reference by the scholar and director in Jerusalem who's comment was published about the NWT.

I thought you had probably factored in my response right about the time I hit enter. Once I got going I was too lazy to stop.

I take it here that the JW's use the NWT.

 

[Nada]

I thought you had probably factored in my response right about the time I hit enter. Once I got going I was too lazy to stop.

I take it here that the JW's use the NWT.

Yes,thats the one they use.

 

[1robin]

Yes,thats the one they use.

Ok, I'm gonna check it out and stuff.

 

[Nada]

Cool deal.: hamster :

 

[1robin]

Cool deal.: hamster :

UUUGGGGHHHHHH. I did not get far. Out of 20 "scholars" chosen based on their unique skills, 17 were all professors from one JW college. Unique is the word, I guess. Even the graduate students used to diffuse the first lie had 5 former students of the same school on board. Not only that but the JW organization only became aware of this other JW committee a year into it's work. I am a Baptist but would be very suspicious of any translation created by a single denomination. I prefer a synthesis from the 12 or so established versions acceptable by and large by most mainstream denominations. This one sounds like Goebbels or Hess was placed in charge of it's creation. As a necessary omission I never got to anything specifically contained within it. Maybe despite all this it is accurate but it's not a good start.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Even "Jerome's Bible Commentary" (Catholic) states that Isaiah is referring to events dealing with the Babylonian exile and does not directly have anything to do with Jesus. But what is "kosher" is that scripture often uses the technique of applying one narrative to another in symbolic fashion for comparison's sake.

I agree...but those using Isaiah, which occurs centuries before, are stretching to fit that narrative to the biblical Yeshua....They're focusing on a couple verses here and there and when taken out of sequence and proper context doesn't do the actual story of Isaiah any justice.....

 

[Dirty Penguin]

You mean John was talking about a different Isaiah?

The writer's interpretation is irrelevant. We know enough about Isaiah to know that what is written in the NT about the biblical Yeshua concerning Isaiah is incorrect.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

It is the Christian belief that Jesus "Emptied Himself" of something that enabled him to become man.

This is the trinitarian belief/interpretation. Not all Christians believe this.

To ignore this is to come to conclusions that will throw off ones understanding of scripture.

It only throws you off and those who believe the way you do.

Lets look even deeper for example: Jesus was a baby and needed to breath air, eat food, learn to walk, and many more. Clearly God nor even the Angels need any of this. Using this same logic, Jesus cant be an angel or anything before being born on earth...

Again, I'm not arguing he was an angel. The only thing I offered is that he "existed" in heave with his god before his god sent him. In fact he said he came not to do his will but the will of his father (his god). It's the biblical Yeshua that makes the destinction that he and his god are not the same.......

Something was different about Jesus as a man that made him just like you and me. Dont you agree that Jesus emptied himself of something to become a man?

No because the biblical Yeshua never expresses himself in this manner. He explicitly said that all authority in heaven and on Earth was "given" to him. If he is "God" before appearing in the flesh then how could he be given authority. One would think that "God" already has authority and that authority can neither be given or taken away...no? So that right there...the biblical Yeshua is telling you plainly he and his god are separate be it before being sent and after his ascension (according to the bible)...

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I bet atheists don't let each other die for want of blood transfusions like Jehovah's Witnesses do..

Nope....No we don't.....

 

[Shuttlecraft]

..to people who put all of their faith in God,and understand what God says about blood in His Word,its not a problem to see where they are coming from

The Bible doesn't mention blood transfusions anywhere!
God gave humans the gift of medical knowledge to do transfusions, so JW's are insulting him by refusing his gift..

 

[Nada]

The Bible doesn't mention blood transfusions anywhere!
God gave humans the gift of medical knowledge to do transfusions, so JW's are insulting him by refusing his gift..

You are correct.It does not mention blood transfusions.That medical practice was not invented yet.What it does mention is that you should not eat blood.Gods Word mentions that the blood is the life.God stresses this.If an Israelite or a foreigner who was staying with an Israelite camp was to do this,they were cut off.If God commanded that you are not to take in blood into your stomach than that means no blood was permitted at all.The NT says to abstain from blood.

Acts 15:20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.

Leviticus 17:10 "'I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people.

Deuteronomy 12:23 Only be sure that you do not eat the blood, for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh.


Genesis 9:4 "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.


Acts 15:20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.

Deuteronomy 12:16 But you must not eat the blood; pour it out on the ground like water.


1 Samuel 14:33 Then someone said to Saul, "Look, the men are sinning against the LORD by eating meat that has blood in it." "You have broken faith," he said. "Roll a large stone over here at once."

So from all of these scriptures we can clearly see how God feels about blood.

Whether it is ingested into to your stomach or put into your veins,it is unacceptable to God.Whether it is a blood sausage or a blood transfusion,its wrong.

 

[Shuttlecraft]

In the old days heathen tribes used to drink blood or slurp up congealed lumps of it, so of course God had to tell them to stop that revolting habit and eat something wholesome instead like fish and chips.
But JW's like to think they know more than the rest of us poor shmucks, so they ban transfusions, just like they ban Christmas trees, Easter eggs, birthday cakes and crosses, you couldn't make it up..

Anyway the New T trashes the Old T's blood verses-
Jesus said - "What goes into a man's mouth does not make him unclean" (Matt 15:11)
Paul said - "I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself." (Romans 14:14)